Legal claims defining the scope of protection. Each claim is shown in both the original legal language and a plain English translation.
1. A system comprising: at least one processor; and memory coupled to the at least one processor, the memory having computer-executable instructions for resolving conflicts to co-edited text that, when executed by the at least one processor, performs a method comprising: receiving, at a server, a first notification from a first client, wherein the first notification indicates a difference between a first client version of a co-edited text accessed by the first client and a master version of the co-edited text accessed by the server; receiving, at the server, a second notification from a second client, wherein the second notification indicates a second difference between a second client version of the co-edited text accessed by the second client and the master version of the co-edited text; in response to receiving the first notification and the second notification, selecting a policy to determine a difference notification, wherein the difference notification comprises one of the first notification or the second notification; selecting the difference notification to process based on the selected policy; updating the master version of the co-edited text with the selected difference notification to provide an updated master version of the co-edited text; and sending an update notification reflecting the selected text change to the first client and the second client.
The system addresses conflicts in real-time collaborative text editing, where multiple users edit the same document simultaneously. The problem arises when conflicting changes from different users are received by a central server, requiring resolution to maintain document consistency. The system includes a server with at least one processor and memory storing executable instructions. The server receives notifications from multiple clients indicating differences between their local versions of the co-edited text and the master version stored on the server. Upon receiving these notifications, the system selects a policy to determine which difference notification to process. The policy may prioritize changes based on factors such as timestamp, user role, or conflict resolution rules. The selected difference is then applied to the master version, updating it accordingly. The server then sends an update notification to all clients, reflecting the resolved changes. This ensures that all users receive a consistent, conflict-free version of the document. The system automates conflict resolution, improving collaboration efficiency and reducing manual intervention.
2. The system of claim 1 , wherein the policy is a first person wins policy that selects a first text change received.
A system for managing text changes in a collaborative editing environment addresses the challenge of resolving conflicts when multiple users submit modifications simultaneously. The system includes a policy enforcement mechanism that determines which text changes take precedence when conflicts arise. In this specific implementation, the policy is a "first person wins" rule, meaning the first text change received by the system is automatically selected and applied, while subsequent conflicting changes are rejected or deferred. The system may also include a conflict detection module to identify overlapping edits and a synchronization module to ensure consistent updates across all connected devices. The policy enforcement mechanism ensures deterministic resolution of conflicts, preventing ambiguity in collaborative editing scenarios. This approach is particularly useful in real-time collaborative applications where multiple users may edit the same document simultaneously, such as in cloud-based word processors, code editors, or project management tools. The system may further include user interfaces to notify users of rejected changes or provide options to resolve conflicts manually. The overall goal is to maintain data integrity and user experience in collaborative environments by enforcing a clear, predictable policy for handling concurrent edits.
3. The system of claim 1 , wherein the server selects a single text change and ignores any other text changes.
The invention relates to a system for managing text changes in a collaborative editing environment, addressing the problem of conflicting or excessive modifications that can disrupt workflow. The system includes a server that processes text changes submitted by multiple users in real-time. To maintain consistency and avoid conflicts, the server selects a single text change from among multiple submitted changes and ignores any other text changes. This ensures that only one modification is applied at a time, reducing the risk of overlapping edits and maintaining document integrity. The system may also include client devices that submit text changes to the server and receive confirmation of the selected change. The server may prioritize changes based on factors such as submission time, user permissions, or edit scope. By enforcing a single change at a time, the system improves collaboration efficiency and minimizes conflicts in shared documents.
4. The system of claim 1 , wherein the updated notification sent to the clients comprises deltas to the current version of the text.
This invention relates to a system for efficiently distributing updates to text content across multiple clients. The problem addressed is the bandwidth and processing overhead associated with sending entire text documents to clients when only small portions of the content have changed. The system tracks changes to a master version of the text and generates deltas, which are the differences between the current and previous versions. These deltas are then transmitted to clients instead of the full text, reducing the amount of data transferred and the computational resources required for synchronization. The system ensures that clients can reconstruct the latest version of the text by applying the received deltas to their locally stored version. This approach is particularly useful in collaborative editing environments, version control systems, or any application where multiple users or devices need to maintain synchronized copies of evolving text content. The deltas may include insertions, deletions, or modifications, and the system may employ algorithms to optimize the size and structure of these deltas for efficient transmission and application. The invention improves performance by minimizing redundant data transfer and processing, making it suitable for environments with limited bandwidth or high latency.
5. The system of claim 1 , wherein the conflict resolution procedure is performed by clients and not performed by the server.
A distributed data synchronization system resolves conflicts between concurrent updates to shared data without relying on a central server. The system operates in environments where multiple clients may modify the same data simultaneously, leading to conflicts that must be resolved to maintain consistency. The system includes a conflict detection mechanism that identifies conflicting updates and a conflict resolution procedure that determines which updates to apply. The resolution procedure is executed locally by each client rather than by a central server, reducing network latency and server load. Clients use predefined rules or algorithms to resolve conflicts based on factors such as update timestamps, user priority, or data semantics. The system ensures that all clients eventually converge to a consistent state despite temporary inconsistencies during synchronization. This decentralized approach improves scalability and fault tolerance, as clients can resolve conflicts independently even if the server is unavailable. The system is particularly useful in collaborative applications, offline-first systems, and peer-to-peer networks where centralized conflict resolution would be inefficient or impractical.
6. The system of claim 1 , wherein the conflict resolution policy comprises merging text of the non-selected text change with the update to the current version of the text.
A system for resolving conflicts in collaborative text editing environments addresses the challenge of merging competing text changes from multiple users. The system includes a conflict resolution policy that automatically integrates non-selected text changes with the current version of the text. This policy ensures that edits from different users are combined rather than discarded, preserving as much of the collaborative input as possible. The system monitors text changes in real-time, identifies conflicts where multiple users modify the same section, and applies the resolution policy to merge the conflicting edits. This approach prevents data loss and maintains a coherent document version history. The system may also include a user interface for displaying conflict notifications and allowing manual override of the automated resolution. The conflict resolution policy can be customized to prioritize certain edits or apply specific merging rules based on user roles or document structure. This solution is particularly useful in environments where multiple users frequently edit the same document simultaneously, such as in software development, legal document drafting, or academic collaboration.
7. A method for resolving conflicts to co-edited text, comprising: receiving, at a server, a first notification from a first client, wherein the first notification indicates a difference between a first client version of a co-edited text accessed by the first client and a master version of the co-edited text accessed by the server; receiving, at the server, a second notification from a second client, wherein the second notification indicates a second difference between a second client version of the co-edited text accessed by the second client and the master version of the co-edited text; in response to receiving the first notification and the second notification, selecting a policy to determine a difference notification, wherein the difference notification comprises one of the first notification or the second notification; selecting the difference notification to process based on the selected policy; updating the master version of the co-edited text with the selected difference notification to provide an updated master version of the co-edited text; and sending an update notification reflecting the selected text change to the first client and the second client.
The invention relates to conflict resolution in collaborative text editing systems where multiple users edit the same document simultaneously. The problem addressed is ensuring consistency and resolving conflicts when different users make conflicting changes to the same text. The system involves a server that manages a master version of the co-edited text and receives notifications from multiple clients indicating differences between their local versions and the master version. The server evaluates these notifications, selects one based on a predefined policy, and updates the master version accordingly. The policy determines which notification to prioritize, such as favoring the first received change, the most recent change, or another conflict resolution strategy. After updating the master version, the server sends an update notification to all clients to reflect the selected change, ensuring all users see the same updated text. This method ensures that conflicts are resolved systematically, maintaining document consistency across all collaborators.
8. The method of claim 7 , wherein the policy is a first person wins policy that selects a first text change received.
This invention relates to systems for managing text changes in collaborative environments, such as document editing platforms. The problem addressed is ensuring consistency and fairness in resolving conflicts when multiple users submit competing text changes to the same document section. Existing solutions may prioritize changes arbitrarily or require manual intervention, leading to inefficiencies and disputes. The invention describes a method for resolving text change conflicts using a "first person wins" policy. When multiple users submit changes to the same text segment, the system automatically selects the first received change and discards subsequent conflicting changes. This ensures a deterministic resolution without requiring user intervention or complex conflict resolution algorithms. The method may be part of a broader system that tracks user edits, detects conflicts, and applies resolution policies to maintain document integrity. The approach is particularly useful in real-time collaborative editing scenarios where rapid decision-making is critical. By prioritizing the first submitted change, the system minimizes disruption and provides a predictable outcome. The invention may also include additional features, such as notifying users of rejected changes or allowing administrators to override the policy in specific cases. The solution improves efficiency in collaborative workflows by reducing the need for manual conflict resolution.
9. The method of claim 7 , wherein the server selects a single text change and ignores any other text changes.
This invention relates to a system for managing text changes in a collaborative editing environment, such as a document or code repository. The problem addressed is the need to efficiently handle multiple conflicting text changes from different users or sources, ensuring consistency and avoiding conflicts in the final document. The system includes a server that receives multiple text changes from one or more clients. The server processes these changes by selecting a single text change while ignoring any other conflicting changes. This selection may be based on predefined criteria, such as timestamp, user priority, or change significance. The server then applies the selected change to the document, ensuring that only one version of the change is incorporated, thus preventing conflicts and maintaining document integrity. The system may also include a client device that sends text changes to the server and receives the updated document after the server's processing. The method ensures that only one text change is applied at a time, reducing the risk of conflicts and simplifying the editing process. This approach is particularly useful in collaborative environments where multiple users may attempt to modify the same section of a document simultaneously. The system may be implemented in various applications, including document editing software, version control systems, or collaborative coding platforms.
10. The method of claim 7 , wherein the updated notification sent to the clients comprises deltas to the current version of the text.
A system and method for efficiently distributing text updates to multiple clients in a collaborative editing environment. The problem addressed is the need to minimize bandwidth and processing overhead when synchronizing text changes across distributed clients, especially in real-time collaborative editing applications. The invention provides a method for generating and transmitting only the incremental differences (deltas) between a current version of the text and a previously sent version, rather than sending the entire updated text. This reduces the amount of data transmitted and processed by each client. The method involves tracking changes to the text, computing the deltas between versions, and sending these deltas to clients. Clients then apply the received deltas to their local copies of the text to reconstruct the current version. The system may also include mechanisms for conflict resolution, version synchronization, and handling client disconnections. The deltas may be encoded in a compact format to further optimize transmission efficiency. This approach is particularly useful in applications such as collaborative document editing, version control systems, and real-time communication platforms where minimizing latency and bandwidth usage is critical.
11. The method of claim 7 , wherein the conflict resolution procedure is performed by clients and not performed by the server.
This invention relates to distributed systems where multiple clients interact with a central server, particularly addressing conflicts that arise when multiple clients attempt to modify the same data simultaneously. The problem being solved is ensuring data consistency and resolving conflicts efficiently without relying solely on the server, which can introduce latency or become a bottleneck. The method involves a conflict resolution procedure that is executed by the clients rather than the server. When a conflict occurs, such as two clients modifying the same data at nearly the same time, the clients detect and resolve the conflict locally. This reduces the load on the server and minimizes communication delays. The clients may use predefined rules, timestamps, or other conflict resolution strategies to determine which modification should take precedence. The server remains involved in the overall synchronization process but does not handle the conflict resolution itself. This approach improves scalability and responsiveness in distributed systems where low-latency conflict resolution is critical.
12. The method of claim 7 , wherein the conflict resolution policy comprises merging text of the non-selected text change with the update to the current version of the text.
This invention relates to conflict resolution in collaborative text editing systems, where multiple users may simultaneously edit the same document, leading to conflicting changes. The problem addressed is how to automatically resolve conflicts between text changes in a way that preserves as much of the intended edits as possible without requiring manual intervention. The method involves detecting conflicting text changes made by different users to the same document. When a conflict is identified, a conflict resolution policy is applied to merge the changes. The policy specifically involves combining the text from a non-selected change with the update to the current version of the document. This ensures that edits from multiple users are integrated rather than discarded, maintaining the collaborative nature of the editing process. The system may also include a mechanism to track the sequence of edits, determine which changes overlap or conflict, and apply the resolution policy only when necessary. The merging process may involve concatenation, insertion, or other text manipulation techniques to integrate the conflicting changes while preserving the structure and meaning of the document. This approach reduces the need for manual conflict resolution, improving efficiency in collaborative editing environments.
13. The method of claim 7 , wherein the conflict resolution procedure is performed by the client when it is determined that the client has a non-selected text change.
A system and method for resolving conflicts in collaborative text editing involves detecting and resolving discrepancies between text changes made by multiple users in real time. The technology addresses the challenge of maintaining consistency in shared documents when multiple users edit the same content simultaneously, which can lead to conflicts if changes overlap or contradict each other. The method includes monitoring text changes made by each user, identifying conflicts where changes affect the same text region, and applying a resolution procedure to determine the correct version. In cases where a client (user device) detects a non-selected text change—a modification that was not explicitly chosen by the user but may conflict with other edits—the client itself performs a conflict resolution procedure. This ensures that the document remains coherent and reflects the intended edits from all collaborators. The resolution may involve merging changes, prioritizing certain edits, or notifying users of conflicts for manual intervention. The system aims to minimize disruptions and maintain a seamless collaborative editing experience.
14. A computer storage device comprising: a processor; and memory coupled to the processor, the memory having computer-executable instructions that, when executed by the processor, performs a method comprising: receiving, at a server, a first notification from a first client, wherein the first notification indicates a difference between a first client version of a co-edited text accessed by the first client and a master version of the co-edited text accessed by the server; receiving, at the server, a second notification from a second client, wherein the second notification indicates a second difference between a second client version of the co-edited text accessed by the second client and the master version of the co-edited text; in response to receiving the first notification and the second notification, selecting a policy to determine a difference notification, wherein the difference notification comprises one of the first notification or the second notification; selecting the difference notification to process based on the selected policy; updating the master version of the co-edited text with the selected difference notification to provide an updated master version of the co-edited text; and sending an update notification reflecting the selected text change to the first client and the second client.
This invention relates to collaborative text editing systems, specifically addressing conflicts that arise when multiple users edit the same document simultaneously. The problem occurs when different clients have divergent versions of a co-edited text, leading to inconsistencies that must be resolved to maintain a single, accurate master version. The solution involves a server that receives notifications from multiple clients indicating discrepancies between their local versions and the master version. The server evaluates these notifications, selects one based on a predefined policy, and updates the master version accordingly. The policy determines which client's changes take precedence, ensuring consistency. After updating the master version, the server notifies all clients of the changes, allowing them to synchronize their local copies. This approach minimizes conflicts and ensures all users work with the most current version of the document. The system includes a processor and memory storing executable instructions to perform these steps, enabling real-time collaboration with reduced synchronization errors.
15. The computer storage device of claim 14 , wherein the policy is a first person wins policy that selects a first text change received.
A system for managing text changes in a collaborative editing environment involves a computer storage device storing instructions for implementing a conflict resolution policy. The system detects multiple conflicting text changes submitted by different users and applies a predefined policy to resolve the conflicts. The policy determines which text change is retained when conflicts occur. In one implementation, the policy is a "first person wins" rule, where the first text change received is selected and applied, while subsequent conflicting changes are discarded. This ensures consistency by prioritizing the earliest submission, preventing overwrites from later changes that may conflict with the initial edit. The system may also include additional features such as tracking user identities, timestamps, and change locations to enforce the policy accurately. The approach is particularly useful in real-time collaborative editing tools where multiple users may edit the same document simultaneously, reducing ambiguity and maintaining document integrity by standardizing conflict resolution.
16. The computer storage device of claim 14 , wherein the server selects a single text change and ignores any other text changes.
A system for managing text changes in a collaborative editing environment involves a server that processes multiple text changes submitted by users. The server identifies conflicting text changes and resolves them by selecting a single text change while ignoring other conflicting changes. This ensures consistency in the edited document by preventing multiple conflicting modifications from being applied simultaneously. The system may also prioritize text changes based on factors such as timestamp, user role, or edit scope to determine which change to retain. The server may further validate the selected text change to ensure it does not introduce errors or inconsistencies before applying it to the document. This approach improves collaboration by reducing conflicts and maintaining document integrity in real-time editing scenarios.
17. The computer storage device of claim 14 , wherein the updated notification sent to the clients comprises deltas to the current version of the text.
A system for efficiently distributing text updates to multiple clients in a collaborative editing environment. The problem addressed is the need to minimize bandwidth and processing overhead when synchronizing text changes across distributed clients, especially in real-time collaborative editing scenarios. The system tracks changes to a shared text document and generates incremental updates (deltas) representing only the differences between the current version and the previous version known to each client. These deltas are then transmitted to the clients, allowing them to reconstruct the latest version of the text without receiving the entire document. The system includes a server that maintains the authoritative version of the text and a mechanism for detecting and recording modifications. When changes occur, the server computes the necessary deltas for each client based on their last acknowledged version. The deltas may include insertions, deletions, or modifications at specific positions within the text. Clients apply these deltas to their local copies to maintain synchronization with the server. This approach reduces network traffic and processing load compared to sending full document updates, particularly in environments with frequent small changes or large documents. The system may also include conflict resolution mechanisms to handle simultaneous edits from multiple clients.
18. The computer storage device of claim 14 , wherein the conflict resolution procedure is performed by clients and not performed by the server.
A system for managing data conflicts in a distributed computing environment involves a server and multiple client devices. The problem addressed is ensuring data consistency across multiple clients without relying solely on a central server for conflict resolution. The system includes a server that stores a shared data set and a plurality of client devices that access and modify the data. Each client device includes a local data store and a conflict resolution module. When a client device detects a conflict between its local data and the server's data, the conflict resolution procedure is executed locally on the client device rather than by the server. This decentralized approach reduces server load and latency, as clients independently resolve conflicts based on predefined rules or algorithms. The system may also include synchronization mechanisms to periodically update the server with resolved data from the clients. The conflict resolution procedure may involve merging changes, prioritizing certain modifications, or applying timestamps to determine the most recent valid update. This design allows for efficient and scalable conflict resolution in distributed systems where multiple clients may simultaneously modify shared data.
19. The computer storage device of claim 14 , wherein the conflict resolution policy comprises merging text of the non-selected text change with the update to the current version of the text.
This invention relates to conflict resolution in collaborative text editing systems, where multiple users may simultaneously edit the same document, leading to conflicting changes. The problem addressed is the need for an automated system to resolve such conflicts without losing important edits while maintaining document integrity. The system includes a computer storage device storing a document and a conflict resolution policy. When a conflict arises between a proposed text change and an existing change, the policy merges the non-selected text change with the update to the current version. This ensures that conflicting edits are combined rather than discarded, preserving both contributions. The system may also track edit histories, identify conflicting changes, and apply the resolution policy automatically. The merging process may involve combining text segments, maintaining formatting, or applying user-defined rules to determine how conflicting edits are integrated. The goal is to minimize manual intervention while ensuring that all relevant edits are retained in the final document. This approach is particularly useful in real-time collaborative editing environments where multiple users work on the same content simultaneously.
20. The computer storage device of claim 14 , wherein the conflict resolution procedure is performed by the client when it is determined that the client has a non-selected text change.
A system for managing text changes in a collaborative editing environment involves a client device that detects and resolves conflicts between concurrent text modifications. The system tracks text changes made by multiple users and identifies conflicts where overlapping or conflicting edits occur. When a conflict is detected, the system determines whether the client has a non-selected text change, meaning an edit that has not been explicitly chosen for inclusion in the final document. If such a non-selected change is found, the client performs a conflict resolution procedure to reconcile the conflicting edits. This procedure may involve merging changes, prioritizing certain edits, or prompting the user to manually resolve the conflict. The system ensures that all text modifications are properly synchronized across all collaborating users while minimizing data loss and maintaining document integrity. The conflict resolution procedure is designed to handle cases where multiple users edit the same text region simultaneously, ensuring that the final document reflects the intended changes without unintended overlaps or omissions. The system operates in real-time, allowing seamless collaboration while automatically resolving conflicts to maintain consistency.
Unknown
March 31, 2020
Browse 5M+ US patents with plain-English claim translations and AI-generated analysis.